Integration and Isolation

Ten years ago, while editing the first edition of this volume, my view was that the success of positive psychology would be marked by its integration into mainstream psychology. As the chapters in this volume show, the practice of positive psychology has attracted interest within various areas of applied psychology, notably clinical (Maddux & Lopez, Chapter 25), counseling (Vossler, Steffen, & Joseph, Chapter 26), forensic (Fortune, Ward, & Mann, Chapter, 37), health (Salsman & Moskowitz, Chapter 24), and organizational psychology (Lewis, Chapter 20). The argument for the relevance of positive psychology is well made in each case. Scholars in other areas are also examining their practices in light of positive psychology, such as in rehabilitation medicine (Peter, Geyh, Ehde, Müller, & Jensen, Chapter 27), the recovery movement (Resnick & Leddy, Chapter 40) and social work (Dekel & Taubman–Ben-Ari, Chapter 39). One of the areas beyond psychology that has proved to be most successful is education as evidenced by the rapidly developing interest in positive education (Kibe & Boniwell, Chapter 18).

It is also clear from these chapters that despite significant progress, positive psychology has much yet to contribute, and its connections within other fields could be more entrenched, before concluding that integration has been achieved.

It seems certain, however, that interest in positive psychology will continue to grow. It is just too good an idea. As practitioners dig down into the positive psychology research they will find much to engage with, such as the work on well-being therapy (Ruini & Fava, Chapter 28), hope interventions (Magyar-Moe & Lopez, Chapter 29), posttraumatic growth (Tedeschi, Calhoun, & Groleau, Chapter 30), emotional intelligence (Caruso, Salovey, Brackett, & Mayer, Chapter 32), gratitude (Bono, Krakauer, & Froh, Chapter 33), wisdom (Kunzmann & Thomas, Chapter 34), choice (Schwartz, Chapter 8), forgiveness (Fincham, Chapter 38), and time perspective (Boniwell & Zimbardo, Chapter 13). What is so vital about these topics is that they cut across the branches of applied psychology.

Likewise the work of Sagy, Eriksson, and Braun-Lewensohn on the sense of coherence concept (Chapter 5); Sagiv, Roccas, and Oppenheim-Weller, on the role of values (Chapter 7); Layous, Sheldon, and Lyubomirsky on how happiness can be increased (Chapter 11); or Parks (Chapter 14) on activities that people can do for themselves, transcend the interests of any single group of practitioners. In each of these chapters there are applications that could be taken up by educationalists, clinicians, leaders, and other practitioners regardless of their contexts of practice. Positive psychology is about thinking differently about what we already do.

In its early days positive psychology grew from the work of scholars and practitioners who were themselves already established in their own fields of abnormal, clinical, social, and personality psychology. It provided a common language that brought people together from these different branches of psychology and stimulated much-needed research into what makes life worth living.

Since then, new scholars and practitioners have been attracted to the ideas of positive psychology. But unlike the first generation of positive psychologists who had already existing identities within their specialist fields, many of the newer generation may now identify themselves first and foremost as a positive psychologist. As such, this seems to be leading to the emergence of positive psychology as a separate branch of psychology. This raises the question of how a separate discipline of positive psychology will coexist with the ambition toward integration.

Paradoxically, it may be that the development of positive psychology as a separate discipline implies that other traditional areas of applied psychology are not concerned with positive functioning and that there is a natural dividing line between the negative and the positive. To me it seems that the field of positive psychology is at a crossroads in which it is not clear whether its mission is ultimately to establish itself as a separate branch of applied psychology or to transform the face of mainstream psychology. It is likely that these two competing paths will continue for some time as those scholars and practitioners interested in becoming part of a new separate discipline organize themselves professionally, and others whose main professional identity is elsewhere as clinical, health, personality, social psychologists, and so on, adopt ideas of positive psychology into their work. Eventually, one path will be more trodden than the other.

From Languishing to Flourishing

Ten years on I still believe that the greatest power of positive psychology is to be an idea that transforms mainstream psychology rather than to become a new and separate discipline of applied psychology. The reason is that I do not view the positive as theoretically separable from the negative.

The very language of positive and negative hinders integration by creating a dichotomy in which practice is seen to be naturally divided between those who specialize from –5 to 0 and those who specialize from 0 to +5.

I would certainly agree that there was a range of professional activity that was not taking place before positive psychology came along, but I would disagree that the theories of psychology were not already up to that job. In many cases the fundamental premise of positive psychology seems to date back to the humanistic theories of scholars such as Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers. To me it seems that the profession of psychology did not fully grasp the implications of its own theories and put them into practice across the spectrum of human functioning. Instead, it was influenced by the illness ideology in its development, and now finds itself as a profession looking back to these original core ideas through the lens of positive psychology. If there is no illness ideology, the distinction between –5 to 0 and 0 to +5 dissolves. Positive psychology can offer an alternative to the illness ideology as discussed by Maddux and Lopez (Chapter 25).

Language is important. If positive psychology is to be truly transformational it must transcend the dichotomous language of negative and positive. As Pauwels (Chapter 46), discusses, it is important that positive psychology clarifies its position in relation to the negative.

Our starting point for scholars must be to examine the concepts in business-as-usual psychology and their relation to positive psychology. Rashid (Chapter 31) points to some of the recent developments in strength-based assessment that reconceptualize psychological disorders as the absence, excess, or opposite of strengths. In this way we can begin to see how the problems and issues of traditional psychology might be accommodated within a positive psychological framework.

Not only do we need to question the concepts we are used to, we also need to consider alternative ways of thinking about human experience. We need to begin to develop new theoretical approaches that are able to accommodate the problems and issues of traditional psychology within a positive psychological framework. One example of such an approach is the new way of thinking about human reactions to adversity in which posttraumatic stress and posttraumatic growth are seen not as two separate responses, each with their own theoretical frameworks, but as interrelated concepts within one single theoretical framework (see Pauwels, Chapter 46). Such an integrative framework is neither a positive psychology nor a negative psychology.

In a similar way, positive psychologists have begun to talk about human flourishing. By this I do not mean any one theorist's view of what this word means, but its use more generally to describe positive functioning. The dictionary definition of flourishing invokes the metaphor of growth as a way to understand human experience. Not growth in the sense that economics uses the term to mean a never ending increase, but growth in the biological sense in which things are born, develop to their best potential, and eventually die.

In the metaphor of growth it is the absence of the conditions that lead to flourishing that lead to languishing. Flourishing and languishing are but descriptions of the same process. We are concerned with both the negative and the positive simultaneously because the focus is on the process not just one outcome of that process. We are also reminded when we think of growth, a biological metaphor instead of a mechanistic one, that we are embodied creatures and that flourishing implies an authentic and organismic connection with our physical selves (Hefferon, Chapter 45).

Integrative thinking that does not assume a natural division between traditional conceptions of the negative and the positive, but seeks to carve human nature at its joints, will deliver new and more productive scientific theories. As such the concept of flourishing, and other integrative ways of thinking, are helpful not only in avoiding a dichotomous message but also in overcoming the simplistic notion that human qualities can be easily divided into those that are positive and negative. Of course, it may turn out that some human experiences may best be considered part of a new separate discipline of positive psychology, but only good theorizing and research that starts by challenging this notion can tell us.

Consistent with the shift in language has been the realization that there is much in common between positive psychology and some aspects of humanistic psychology (see Robbins, Chapter 3). Initially, positive psychologists distanced themselves from humanistic psychology. Perhaps this was advantageous in maintaining credibility for the fledging positive psychology movement. But in so doing, early positive psychology overlooked the rich theoretical development associated with some of the pioneering humanistic psychologists such as Maslow and Rogers.

Maslow and Rogers were ahead of their time. Today there is greater recognition of their work and positive psychology is beginning to catch up. Most notably, there has been a shift from an initial focus on hedonistic well-being to eudaimonic well-being (see Huta, Chapter 10). Maslow used the term self-actualization. Rogers used the term fully functioning. Nonetheless, theirs was a eudaimonic psychology.

Humanistic psychologists, by and large, have always been positive psychologists in the sense that their interest was always in self-actualization, fully functioning, and living an optimal life. But positive psychologists have not necessarily been humanistic insofar as their core assumptions have not always been consistent with the notions of growth, holism, responsibility and intentionality, and so on. But this seems to be changing. Some of the best humanistic psychology now happening is under the umbrella of positive psychology.

Maslow and Rogers, as Robbins (Chapter 3) points out, had a vision consistent with the Aristotelian view now attracting attention from positive psychologists (see Nafstad, Chapter 2). As such, positive psychology has begun to offer a more humanistic vision of the person as endeavoring to realize their core nature. A challenge for positive psychology is whether it will be possible to converge around a set of agreed principles and whether the Aristotelian perspective currently attracting attention will prove to provide cohesion.

A related perspective that has become a core topic of positive psychology, is self-determination theory (Brown & Ryan, Chapter 9). Self-determination theory also views the person as an active growth-oriented organism, attempting to actualize his or her potentialities within the environment he or she functions in, but provides stronger empirical evidence.

One can see why many humanistic psychologists looked on with surprise at positive psychology as it seemed to be a reinvention of what they had long been advocating. And one can also see how the impetus of positive psychology has succeeded in putting these ideas back on the mainstream agenda when humanistic psychology struggled to do so. However, it is worth reflecting on the history of humanistic psychology and how it once promised to transform business as usual, as positive psychology now does, but lost its impetus, becoming instead isolated as a separate specialist area. It may be that positive psychology will similarly lose its influence if it becomes too inward looking and does not continue to promote its ideas outwardly to all corners of the profession of psychology.

Theory Into Practice

All practice is ultimately grounded in some philosophical viewpoint. A growth model is radically different in its implications for practice than the medical model.

A growth model implies that the organism has the resources within it to flourish if the nutrient conditions are right. Farmers do not grow the corn; it grows itself, even where there are no farmers. What farmers do is cultivate and nurture the corn. Flourishing, in this sense, therefore describes a process that takes place within people. But this is not automatic. We cannot make people flourish; we can only provide the conditions that enable them to flourish.

We now have the evidence that we flourish when connected in close, supportive relationships (Myers, Chapter 41). As already noted, self-determination theory offers a contemporary and empirically supported view of how relationships lead to flourishing (see Sagiv, Roccas, & Oppenheim-Weller, Chapter 7; Brown & Ryan, Chapter 9). Relationships that support peoples' basic needs and that foster their intrinsic motivation are important determinants of human flourishing. The implications of such an approach are considered in relation to youth (Larson & Dawes, Chapter, 19), at work (Henry, Chapter 22) and life coaching (Tarragona, Chapter 15). Leaders need to cultivate resources within the person (Clarke, Arnold, & Connelly, Chapter 21) as do coaches (Kauffman, Joseph, & Scoular, Chapter 23).

The same applies even when working with clinical patients (Delle Fave, Fianco, & Sartori, Chapter 36) and even those some may consider beyond compassion (Fortune, Ward, & Mann, Chapter, 37). We know how to help people flourish and what it takes to lead a longer healthier life (Vaillant, Chapter 35).

Much of positive psychology to date has been concerned with interventions with populations already languishing in some way and seeking to develop their capacity to flourish. As well as these downstream activities, we now need to also think in terms of what positive psychology can do upstream. Increasingly, attention is being paid to the development of public policies that can foster flourishing societies (Thin, Chapter 43). In one example, Kasser (Chapter 6) shows us the dangers of consumer culture and offers valuable suggestions for how we might weaken the vision of the goods life reflected in our money-driven, consumer culture. The ideas of positive psychology can be built into policy, planning, and systems, as discussed by Myers (Chapter 41), Veenhoven (Chapter 42), and Yates, Tyrell, and Masten (Chapter 44).

The most important upstream activity is education (Fineburg & Monk, Chapter 16). Facilitating resilience and well-being as part of school activities (Kibe & Boniwell, Chapter 18) and fostering young people's ability to think for themselves (Reznitskaya & Wilkinson, Chapter 17) are vital if we want to promote flourishing in the next generation.

Conclusion

Imagine a world in which positive psychology was built into public policy, education, organizational systems, and health care. Editing this book has convinced me that so far we have seen but a fraction of what could be achieved by positive psychology. I hope within this book you will have found something to support your practice and feel inspired to make positive psychology part of your own vision.

Summary Points

• A wealth of empirical evidence shows that well-being can be increased.
• Approaches to the promotion of human flourishing are developing in educational settings, clinics, workplaces, and communities.
• Positive psychology is at a crossroads as to whether its aim is to transform traditional areas of practice or to be a new specialty in its own right.
• Positive psychology must examine its deepest philosophical principles and notions about human nature.
• Positive psychology needs theoretical perspectives that can dissolve the dichotomy between the positive and negative.
• Applications in positive psychology have been both upstream and downstream, but the balance now needs to be shifted toward upstream activities, to build human flourishing into public policy, education, organizational systems, and health care.